So as I keep going through all the budget documentation, I thought I'd start by going over something that still annoys me. If you decide to download the 44MB Research & Development, Navy (BA 5) (PDF) and go to PDF page 523, you'll find $17,348,000 for Standard Missile Improvements described as follows.A. Mission Description and Budget Item JustificationYes, American politicians and people like the Secretary of Defense, the CJCS, and the CNO are intentionally ignoring what might have been perjury that took place in 2008 to truncate DDG-1000. Why? I have no idea, no one thinks it was questionable how Navy leaders unilaterally shifted hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars around based on what appears to have been blatantly false and misleading statements under oath.
Modifications to SM-2 BLK IIIB are required for use on DDG-1000 class destroyers. The Joint Universal Waveform Link (JUWL) will be integrated with ESSM and Standard Missile to communicate with the DDG-1000 SPY-3 radar. SM-2 missile software will be updated with interrupted continuous wave illumination (ICWI) in order to allow operation with DDG-1000.
B. Accomplishments/Planned Programs
Description: DDG-1000 Pre Plan Product Improvement (P3I)Link Integration/Interrupted Continuous Wave Illuminator (ICWI)
FY 2010 Accomplishments:
ESSM conducted Preliminary Design Review (PDR), assembled Proof of Design (POD) assets, and conducted Design Verification Testing (DVT). SM-2 conducted System Requirements Review and System Functional Review, and began design development. ICWI development delayed 16 months as a result of FY10 reduction.
FY 2011 Plans:
ESSM conducts Critical Design Review (CDR), orders and assembles Production Representative Model (PRM) assets, and conducts qualification testing. SM-2 conducts PDR for JUWL only and orders POD hardware.
FY 2012 Plans:
ESSM completes qualification testing and Test Readiness Review, and completes the Inert Operational Missile (IOM) to aid in ship-to-missile integration. SM-2 conducts DVT on POD hardware, conducts PDR for ICWI, conducts CDR for JUWL only, and orders PRMs.
Because Senators, Congressmen, and military leaders have all ignored the questionable approach the Navy took in truncating the DDG-1000, I am left to draw the conclusion that the Navy as an institution, and maybe OSD and Congress as well, believes Raytheon apparently sucks that bad when it comes to developing combat systems for warships. How else are we supposed to explain it? I do not know how else to reconcile this when the FY10, FY11, and FY12 budgets all continue to fund Standard missile development for the DDG-1000, yet Vice Admiral Barry McCullough testified under oath in August of 2008 that the DDG-1000 "cannot successfully employ the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2), SM-3 or SM-6."
Look, I get it. The ESSM is the primary weapon system of the DDG-1000 - but that is also by choice. The option to integrate SM-2 missiles has always existed, and the R&D investment assured it always will be an option. For some the ends justify the means.
Raytheon has apparently reinvented every possible wheel to avoid using AEGIS in the DDG-1000 combat system. That makes no sense at all to me, because AEGIS is government owned and would have been a perfectly good starting place for development. The question I have is whether or not there are any delays with the DDG-1000 combat system software?
I ask for this reason - the awards for DDG-1001 and DDG-1002 are excepted to come sometime over the next 2 and half months. Since the the FY 2010 DOT&E Annual Report (PDF) somehow decided not to include the DDG-1000 in the unclassified report this year, we do not have a good status on the development of DDG-1000. Considering we have testimony about the DDG-1000 under oath by current Navy leaders that is... inaccurate, and contracts about to be issued, oh and the DDG-1000 program is the largest new surface combatant program of record with an actual contract right now... I'm thinking honest information about this program would be a nice change of pace.
No comments:
Post a Comment